In an attempt to build my portfolio, I have agreed to several photo shoots free of charge while I work on improving my off-camera lighting skills. I’ve recently been approached by a parent of 16 year old daughter interested in building a portfolio for a possible modeling career, but since I’m not a professional photographer (yet), and my instincts are telling me there may be some legal ramifications and risks that would make this a situation something best to avoid. I’m in the US, so I’m wondering if anyone here has had a similar experience or could offer some advice. If I were to move forward, I would insist that a parent be present during the shoot, and have a release signed, so I don’t know if I’m being overly cautious, but this can be a crazy world at times, and I’m wondering if it might be best just to pass on this one. Thanks.

She brought the ad to the attention of her attorney. I think the attorney smelled money and started the process. Ultimately there was no cost on my side, because, other than the tiny advertisement she had no proof. I did tell her to contact the source of the ad and ask them for a copy of the model release. More work for her, but I believe that the company provided it and she realized she had no case against me. If she was an experienced attorney, she would have asked for the release for the model used in the ad first. But it still shows that anyone can be sued, for any reason - even without merit.

Wow, this is what I suspected, you just never know about some people unfortunately. While I really appreciate the great suggestions so far, especially the videotaping idea, I’m thinking this is just not worth the hassle, because even if I am legally within my rights, I would still be required to bear the cost of a legal defense if I were to be sued. Also, I’m sure my creativity would be stifled if during the entire shoot, if I were thinking about whether I could be sued or not. I would really love to help a young person get a start, but unfortunately, I just don’t think it’s worth the risk. Very sad.

The only advice that is of any value, is to ignore anything you'll read here and speak to a privacy attorney who specializes in releases.

I will give you an example of why and how I dealt with it.

In 1969 I gathered a bunch of people to do a catalog shoot for a retail store in NYC. I found some attractive people, dressed them up in outdoor gear, and shot about 100 images (film days, large format). The catalog idea was abandoned and the pictures were never used for any reason. Any and all proofs were always in my possession and were never given to anyone. About 25 yrs later, I get a letter from an attorney, claiming I used a picture of her client, without permission, for commercial purposes, and she intended to proceed with a lawsuit for punitive and compensatory damages. The girl in question was 17 at the time.

I asked to see the image in question. It was of a young woman dressed in full skiing gear, in the snow, in a 1.5" single column advertisement in a magazine. I shot my pictures in September in NY, not a flake of snow in sight. I then proceeded to question this attorney as to why she thought that an image that was in a completely different context from what I had shot, not to mention that the face was maybe a 1/4" high and only vaguely resembled the complainant, was somehow her. I told her I had a model release, the negs and any proofs never left my possession, and I thought her entire argument was baseless. She wanted to see the negatives, claiming that somehow I had hired a graphic artist to lift the face off of one my my pictures and paste it into the advertisement. I countered with the argument that no one would have gone to so much trouble to do something like this for such a tiny ad, which was for a skiing destination and not showcasing the model, and aside from 1000s of stock images, they could have more easily shot the image they needed. I sent her the model release, with the parent's signature, and I never heard back from her, but not before she took a deposition, conducted by phone, from me.

So, yes, even if a parent "agrees" to have their child included in a portfolio, even for their own use, get the permission in writing. Have an attorney draw up a proper release. Be safe.

You can be sued for anything. I shoot minors frequently. I would not get worked up about it. But you should take a few additional precautions.

1. The minor should always have a legal guardian chaperone. You need to be sure that this person is, in fact, a legal guardian. Obtain photocopies of the model and chaperone IDs.

2. Use a model release and get signatures for both model and chaperone. Unless you have some specific commercial application, I would limit the model release to cover use of the photos in your portfolio (web site, social media) if that is your intent.

3. Get concurrence for acceptable photos. In fact, I stipulate that pictures must be approved by the model and chaperone for use in my portfolio, via a separate model release that includes those images. This avoids the issue that the model and/or chaperone were not aware of the photos you use.

4. Delete all photos that do not have a subsequent use approval. Mistakes happen, and you don't want to use a photo that was not approved.

5. Keep good records. I put date and model names in image metadata, image file names, model releases, model release file names. Keep good contact information for model and guardian as well.

If you want to subsequently use one of the photos for commercial purposes, then you can contact the model and legal guardian. You'll need a separate model release for the specific commercial purpose (usually, the customer will want that anyway).